Jump to content

Sudbury trails


hancop

Recommended Posts

CP police are sitting on the trails charging people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, soupkids said:

CP police are sitting on the trails charging people.

Wow getting ugly there. Sounds like not going to open any time soon either. That is too bad! Maybe word will get around and people will stay off for a change, otherwise trails could be gone for good you think? 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Strong Farmer said:

Wow getting ugly there. Sounds like not going to open any time soon either. That is too bad! Maybe word will get around and people will stay off for a change, otherwise trails could be gone for good you think? 
 

No idea, hope not.

I'm very lucky where I am, trail closures have not really affected me unless I want to go west.

Edited by soupkids
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, zoso said:

Nope but locals know where the trail is and do not see that. Kinda like the train Tressel that connects D to C over the wahnapitae river. It has been condemned but everyone rides over it. 

Being local, I am very surprised it is not barricaded on both ends. There would be no way around the barricades because the sides are a good 60' or more drop.

I too, heard people were getting a ticket if they cross the CP lines, &170.00 or so?

Edited by Jason T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jason T said:

Being local, I am very surprised it is not barricaded on both ends. There would be no way around the barricades because the sides are a good 60' or more drop.

I too, heard people were getting a ticket if they cross the CP lines, &170.00 or so?

I think CP put up gates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that a portion of the C111D at Windy Lake that was 'Red' last week, has been totally removed from the ITG. Has that happened everywhere in the STP area where the rail crossings were 'Red'? Is it happening all over the province where the non-agreements with OPG and Conservation Authorities were keeping trails closed? Does removing the trail from the ITG mean that the trail is a total los for this year? I've read as much as I can find on this issue, but can't say as I have heard from the OFSC officially. Have I missed something from head office? Surely this is still not seen as a club or district issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Far as I know:

  - Removal was done to prevent any confusion i.e. people riding the red portion of trail. By removing it, there should be no confusion.

 - The ones that are removed, my opinion is they will not open this year, unless an agreement is made very soon.

- Last I have been told that ofsc says it is up to clubs and districts to have land use agreements in place and signed off.

 

There are some Pi$$ed off people that started a FB page trying to get answers down south from OFSC, but they haven't gotten anywhere so far. 

 

 

Edited by Jason T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wish I knew more,  I am staying positive. I heard Ottawa area was able to get some sort of deal in place but i do not know the details unfortunately. Club meeting tonight so hope to be able to attend, not sure if Sudbury has made any progress.

 

 

Edited by Jason T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thete is WAY more to the whole CP thing.

I know the issues but cannot say, sorry.

The whole problem started with 1 slender in Ontario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jason T said:

Far as I know:

  - Removal was done to prevent any confusion i.e. people riding the red portion of trail. By removing it, there should be no confusion.

 - The ones that are removed, my opinion is they will not open this year, unless an agreement is made very soon.

- Last I have been told that ofsc says it is up to clubs and districts to have land use agreements in place and signed off.

 

There are some Pi$$ed off people that started a FB page trying to get answers down south from OFSC, but they haven't gotten anywhere so far. 

 

 

Yup, best to remove a trail off ITG if there is no hope for the season, especially if it hadn't yet opened in the first place..

 

Those people on that particular page are more of a detriment to the clubs, districts and ofsc cause than they will ever realize. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Yukon Cornelious said:

Yup, best to remove a trail off ITG if there is no hope for the season, especially if it hadn't yet opened in the first place..

 

Those people on that particular page are more of a detriment to the clubs, districts and ofsc cause than they will ever realize. 

Yukon, i know you are very involved in your club and snowmobiling in general, and are respected here, and by me as well.

I agree with taking the trails off of the ITG as well, but more for the touring riders planning a trip.

Won't do much if anything to prevent many of the locals who know where the trail is/goes to, unfortunately, and seemingly don't give a crap or play stupid, claiming that they didn't know. Even as they managed to get past a closed gate or two. At least that's what I have seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, soupkids said:

Thete is WAY more to the whole CP thing.

I know the issues but cannot say, sorry.

The whole problem started with 1 slender in Ontario.

X2

The reason(s) of why this happened is out there. I literally just found out an hour ago. I think a lot of mis-information and rumors could have been avoided if the information was available sooner.

 

Edited by Jason T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Jason T said:

X2

The reason(s) of why this happened is out there. I literally just found out an hour ago. I think a lot of mis-information and rumors could have been avoided if the information was available sooner.

 

WTF. Why the secrecy? Does anyone know why the OFSC doesn’t comment on an issue that threatens the trail system we all pay to ride on?  If the “leadership” refuses to inform the members, someone should have the cahonas to talk about it! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Xfirecat said:

WTF. Why the secrecy? Does anyone know why the OFSC doesn’t comment on an issue that threatens the trail system we all pay to ride on?  If the “leadership” refuses to inform the members, someone should have the cahonas to talk about it! 

Yeah that sucks and trail pass numbers are going to tank next year if this keeps up. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Crow said:

Yukon, i know you are very involved in your club and snowmobiling in general, and are respected here, and by me as well.

I agree with taking the trails off of the ITG as well, but more for the touring riders planning a trip.

Won't do much if anything to prevent many of the locals who know where the trail is/goes to, unfortunately, and seemingly don't give a crap or play stupid, claiming that they didn't know. Even as they managed to get past a closed gate or two. At least that's what I have seen.

I have been inactive as a club volunteer for 2 seasons. More involved at the Provincial level, but still like to still get my hands dirty on trails, helping out various clubs.

 

It seems to be the new culture these days, playing stupid and asking for forgiveness when caught.  

 

As for the trail being removed from the ITG for a season. It is likely being treated as a decommissioned trail since no Land Permission was granted for the season.  Trail Closed signs should  be posted and the club moves along until next year. Having a trail still listed on the ITG, is more inviting for trespassers intentional or not.  

 

My view anyways!

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Strong Farmer said:

And no wonder they removed how many actual km’s Of trail is open, a few years back. Now we can’t see actual number no more. 

Screenshot_2020-01-22-16-57-45.thumb.png.a16faa450bc536f8f28ad63e536bdec8.png

Drop tab top left corner. On my phone anyway.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xfirecat said:

WTF. Why the secrecy? Does anyone know why the OFSC doesn’t comment on an issue that threatens the trail system we all pay to ride on?  If the “leadership” refuses to inform the members, someone should have the cahonas to talk about it! 

The clubs cahonas are talking about it. The OFSC barrie office knows what's going on no doubt. But for them to put out a statement for each club, comment on sensitive info, it's best to be left at the club and district offices to deal with. 

 

Regardless , blame will always be pointed at the Barrie office, but they aren't the ones making the agreements,  the clubs are. 

 

As for secrecy, I think Excom and Corporate communications have been more transparent than ever. There does come to a point where a corporation needs to protect its stakeholders, call it a secrecy if you wish...

Edited by Yukon Cornelious
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, By cahonas, I was referring to.....courage. Any organization like the OFSC, and I am not blaming them by the way, needs to communicate to it’s members if there are problems in delivering services or product. What I am asking for is communication and have done so appropriately via their email. Many organizations will post a regional report explaining the facts. I have attended a recent local club meeting and It wasn’t discussed but that was before the rumours started flying. This season the weather hasn’t been cooperative. Many members will have to trailer to be able to sled this winter. If it’s a sensitive situation, more reason to stop the rumours by carefully utilizing the facts. Closed trails without explanation will result in a reduction of trail passes next year. Just sayin. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole CP thing surfaced about 10 days ago as to the exact reasons of no trails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Yukon Cornelious said:

The clubs cahonas are talking about it. The OFSC barrie office knows what's going on no doubt. But for them to put out a statement for each club, comment on sensitive info, it's best to be left at the club and district offices to deal with. 

 

Regardless , blame will always be pointed at the Barrie office, but they aren't the ones making the agreements,  the clubs are. 

 

As for secrecy, I think Excom and Corporate communications have been more transparent than ever. There does come to a point where a corporation needs to protect its stakeholders, call it a secrecy if you wish...

I agree with you to a point but if the issue is OFSC Insurance and possibly a change in policy direction from the OFSC and their Insurer, then I think that the OFSC does have a responsibility to step up and state the reasons why they cannot have Clubs or Districts enter into LUPs that are too onerous with respect to liability outside of the snowmobiling season, if in fact that is the issue.

 

The Clubs and Districts need OFSC to be up front with these new issue being faced with the railways, conservation authorities and other landowners that may be requiring the OFSC to accept greater liability than is reasonable.

 

The Districts and Clubs are not equipped to speak to this issue and more importantly how the issues will be resolved, or not, in the long term.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Xfirecat said:

Paul, By cahonas, I was referring to.....courage. Any organization like the OFSC, and I am not blaming them by the way, needs to communicate to it’s members if there are problems in delivering services or product. What I am asking for is communication and have done so appropriately via their email. Many organizations will post a regional report explaining the facts. I have attended a recent local club meeting and It wasn’t discussed but that was before the rumours started flying. This season the weather hasn’t been cooperative. Many members will have to trailer to be able to sled this winter. If it’s a sensitive situation, more reason to stop the rumours by carefully utilizing the facts. Closed trails without explanation will result in a reduction of trail passes next year. Just sayin. 

Agree 100%.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, bbakernbay said:

I agree with you to a point but if the issue is OFSC Insurance and possibly a change in policy direction from the OFSC and their Insurer, then I think that the OFSC does have a responsibility to step up and state the reasons why they cannot have Clubs or Districts enter into LUPs that are too onerous with respect to liability outside of the snowmobiling season, if in fact that is the issue.

 

The Clubs and Districts need OFSC to be up front with these new issue being faced with the railways, conservation authorities and other landowners that may be requiring the OFSC to accept greater liability than is reasonable.

 

The Districts and Clubs are not equipped to speak to this issue and more importantly how the issues will be resolved, or not, in the long term.

Your pretty close to the truth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...